City threatens takeover of demolition project
Jefferson City leaders are pushing property owners to take action now to address a collapsing wall.
Jefferson City’s building official, Larry Burkhardt, sent a letter to three property owners Monday insisting that action be taken to address a collapsing building because of the risk of “total failure” of the building and possibly its neighbor. If no action is taken by Oct. 24, Burkhard wrote, the city “will start the process of ordering the repair or demolition of (the buildings involved).”
The owners of 200, 202 and 204 E. High St. in downtown Jefferson City have been discussing how to safely demolish 200 E. High St. without damaging the others. The three buildings are connected by shared walls. Burkhardt said the city believes 200 and 204 were built as free-standing buildings and 202 was built using the walls of its neighbors, making 202 “structurally dependent upon (202 and 204).”
The partial collapse began on June 7 and canceled that day’s edition of the city’s Thursday Night Live event series. Since then the hole has inched up and now spans all three floors of the building.
The letter warns that additional collapse is expected, and that the top section of partially collapsed wall is “failing faster” because of the progressing damage.
“At this time, no progress has been made the property owners to abate the dangerous situation,” Burkhardt said. ” The 200 building is deteriorating faster with it being open to the elements. If the building fails, it will cause the total failure of 202 and possibly severely damage 204.”
“If appropriate measures are not taken, there will be substantial losses for all parties – including the City of Jefferson and the community.”
Businesses that work out of 202 E. High St. have already begun to relocate because of the increasing risk. One business owner at 204 does not plan to move.
Burkhardt told ABC 17 News on Tuesday that all three property owners have agreed to meet to discuss what to do next. He said a date for the meeting has not been set.
Three possible recommendations were included in Burkhardt’s letter.
The first recommends using the initial design of the building by focusing around the shared wall between 200 and 202 E. High St. This option “would need more more investigation since it assumes the party wall is still stable,” Burkhardt wrote.
Second, Burkhardt said the property owners could “place interior framing in 202 to remove the vertical load off the party walls.” This option may prove to be complicated because it would require improvements to the foundation and “a new exterior west wall” for 202. This option would make 202 an independent structure.
A third option is to disconnect 202 from 204 and demolish 200 and 202 simultaneously. Burkhardt said this “could be the safest and most economical course.”
